'A spokesman for Gatwick Airport said Easyjet's position was based on its own "narrow commercial interests".'
To quote Mandy Rice Davies of Profumo scandal fame (circa 1963): "well he would, wouldn't he".
Double edged !
If they DID move to LHR does that not confirm that you may as well close LGW, not sure what LGWs outstanding USP would be !
Would there be anybody left ....?
According to U2's submission to the Commission, it's expansion to LHR that's envisaged, not a move from LGW.
If they support LHR expansion but are not interested in moving is it not because other airlines will have to pick up part of the tab allowing them to corner the LGW market without the inflated cost of paying for a new runway ?
The steep rise in higher charges at LGW to pay for a another rwy is a concern for U2,
obviously. These would have to be passed on to pax in higher fares, or result in lower dividends for shareholders.
Bit like BHX supporting LGW, a warm embrace with one arm whilst sticking two fingers up with the other as they know expansion at LGW will not effect them one iota !
Nothing like it.
Have a look at U2's submission to the Commission, it's a good read and makes a lot of sense. Page 15 outlines what a U2 operation at LHR might be like.
http://corporate.easyjet.com/~/media...on-jan2015.pdf
Skip
I told you about VN maybe a year+ ago (check my posts) please keep up old news always going to happen will be T4 I believe. Had it from horses mouth in HCM so to speak.
Also predicted that, it was inevitable. It's the same for any carrier in the LGW "waiting room".
How many EZY a/c at LGW ? 60 or more is it ?? Not a cat in hells chance all those will move to LHR even if they do start from there. LGW need not worry too much.
No, not
move to LHR: expansion. When U2 started at LGW, it did not
move from LTN, it's still there.
What does it say about LGW expansion if their main tennant would prefer LHR? Or would BA prefer no third runway if it kept Team Orange at Gatwick...
No, BA needs the third rwy, with or without a U2 presence.